Why do not the interchangeable lenses on the scheme's trunk like a ultrakompaktov?

Pages: 1

20.06.2009 16:26:00
Why do not interchangeable lenses scheme trunk, like ultrakompaktov?
e. Folding, do not work in the folded state.
At least for a system of micro 4/3?
and where you can see the optical circuits such lenses?
 

20.06.2009 16:34:00
probably because of all the advantages of the folded lens eat enlarged the dimensions of the camera and deterioration.

20.06.2009 16:36:00
and the size of the lens does not allow such to achieve. . . imho

20.06.2009 17:05:00
To format camera zooms like even do not do it. Obviously the case still in size.

20.06.2009 17:07:00
1) zoom electric eats akkumy.
2) poor quality, low accuracy, backlash.
3) dust will climb.
4) in total diameter in size twice.

and all this for what?

20.06.2009 17:13:00
For the sake of compactness! Actually, medium format rangefinder and some narrow-format camera lens accordion folded and in the inoperative position the camera plane. . and in working hoo what! So folding lenses have been and will be!

20.06.2009 18:01:00
You can make a lens with a lens of a poly film and fold it into a small lump after use. Conveniently, but he will need this?

And what lenses scheme trunk ?
That is quite a trunk:

http: // a. img-dpreview. com / lensreviews / tamron_18-270_3p5-6p3_vc_n15 / Images / allroundview-001. jpg (480x642, 47, 4Kb)
Just do not understand who is behind this miracle money gives. . .

20.06.2009 18:01:00

Actually, medium format rangefinder and some narrow-format camera lens accordion folded and in the inoperative position the camera plane. . and in working hoo what! So folding lenses have been and will be!

Then will and quality, as 50 years ago. Soft (ie soap) picture barrel, vignetting, chromatic pret not childish.
Requirements picture has since tightened considerably, photographers have become spoiled. Plus
dust, plus forget about AF (where the mechanism put it?), The more IF.

If you're willing to live with that - go ahead.
And so, the usual type of dish soap zoom SX200 gives a better picture camera 40 years ago, and only for convenience in a thousand times better.

20.06.2009 18:41:00
quote:
:
That's quite a trunk:
http: // a. img-dpreview. com / lensreviews / tamron_18-270_3p5-6p3_vc_n15 / Images / allroundview-001. jpg (480x642, 47, 4Kb)
Just do not understand who is behind this miracle money gives. . .

not so bad with the Brigde, if you do not deal with pixel peeping-ohm at 100-200%, and print photos.

20.06.2009 18:44:00

And how wonderful you are ready to wear fixes to cover a range of focal lengths?

20.06.2009 19:05:00

Why do not interchangeable lenses scheme trunk, like ultrakompaktov?
Why do not already do. . . The new the compact micro 4/3 regular whale 14-42 made double "trunk" for the nomination of the first trunk optics to the operating mode and the second trunk to zoom, everything is done with it handles twisting the zoom ring, not a motor (IMHO it Plus, joysticks Zoom is some gemmoroj). But all the same, and the zoom "pancake" can not be called because the compact with interchangeable lenses Lens not go into the camera body and lens bayonet mount do not go further. Although Olympus could have done, the lens on the camera more "flat" if it were in a state of "parking" of the lens goes back camera (as it was in FEDov ranging from folding "INDUSTAR"), there is no mirror. But maybe in the future and will make for bolshematrichnyh compact with interchangeable lenses.
 

20.06.2009 19:41:00

And how wonderful you are ready to wear fixes to cover a range of focal lengths?
One Good shtatnik and telefiks at 300. But there is off. Against in-zooms nothing.



But maybe in the future and will make for bolshematrichnyh compact with interchangeable lenses. The idea
size of the matrix is ​​to influence the size of the lens inside the lens? Or only on the diameter, and can put them side by side?

20.06.2009 19:45:00
Why do not interchangeable lenses scheme trunk, like ultrakompaktov?
e. Folding, do not work in the folded state.
At least for a system of micro 4/3?
and where you can see the optical circuits such lenses? Find
description of the first pre-war FED cameras, there INDUSTAR formed and was replaceable. . .

20.06.2009 23:23:00


Then will and quality, as 50 years ago.

Manda-22 from the vigilant (50 years just typed...)
unless there was soap, unsharp picture?
then I'm all for such mylnost ))

21.06.2009 9:51:00
A scheme that such "trunk"? Telescopic chtoli? As fishing rods folding?

21.06.2009 11:53:00
The idea
size of the matrix is ​​to influence the size of the lens inside the lens? Or only on the diameter, and can put them side by side?
them and put in a compact, lens to lens. In the large lens is a problem because of the greater thickness of the lens than the compacts. In rangefinder (mirrorless) cameras have one plus intracameral free space almost to the gate. There and you can "roll" of the lens in the "parking". Olympus micro 4/3 of this is not yet implemented, but implemented only "convergence" of optical units in the new micro 4/3 14-42. If he would have done something to the lens "recessed" into the camera lens was then that would be a bit thicker, "pancake". But there is one thing, but. To reduce the diameter of the lens mount Olympus micro 4/3 in creating his own difficulties in creating a "recessed" lenses. . . After the camera in the parking mode should include the whole design with tube and not only block the rear lens, and it is a decent piece diameter. . . We had to leave 4/3 bayonet and then was, would be the place to enter into the chamber with a diameter up to 35mm damn. But if it were in the new standard they left the diameter of 4/3, and the block removal rate data altered by another, such as from Nikon, the diameter of the tube entering the body, could be increased up to 42mm! ! !
I wonder how to solve this puzzle Sams? If he does as I wrote above we can expect "blinozumov." True meaning of such zumah will only SHU-type zoom 20-50. . . 80mm EGF for this telezumov bespoleznyak, but not necessary, flat dalnomerki just good for Shu-normal range of focus, because they have to win SHU because of the possibility of using short posterior segment. Well, for a photoshoot with telephoto reflex leave "as is".

21.06.2009 19:09:00
I do not to understand why on mirrorless cameras not hide part of the lens in the carcass. Remember duplicate objects ranging Jupiter-12 as he stands on the camera looks quite a pancake. And only when it is removed, it is clear that he is not a pancake, just pretty big lens unit to hide inside the camera.

21.06.2009 22:26:00


Manda-22 from the vigilant (50 years just typed...)
unless there was soap, unsharp picture?
then I'm all for such mylnost))


I'm afraid that the picture from the I-22 - really good level compacts. I have a few photos of "those days", taken just "vigilant" with this lens - then they seemed to be very good quality. Now - so yourself. . .

21.06.2009 23:17:00

Well half SHU fixes rangefinder and made look optics Voigt. . . that's just it's Fix. With zumami situevina will be more difficult, but if you count the marketing demanding users something to the camera was as flat as possible in the transport position, they will do though, would be a shoo-retractable zoom lenses. Only time will tell.

21.06.2009 23:41:00
Ssss I can not catch up, well, just do something so the optics are doing. Well I test today Sony 18-205, and so he has 2 more nturi sleeves, which are put forward with increasing focus. If you do this.
 

22.06.2009 18:25:00
Need a pancake. Raise the mirror and park there. bayonet need a big, I think more than the matrix.

Only time and back to the parking lot before the shooting will be many. But you can automatically extend when. And markovat when turned off. Total

can get a compact 28-80 and 45 F4 Max. Thickness of 3 centimeters off.

Pages: 1

Why do not the interchangeable lenses on the scheme's trunk like a ultrakompaktov?

info@www.about-digital-photo.com